Arbitrator orders government to pay former STC employees 9 weeks lost salary and benefits
STC violated collective agreement and Canadian Labour Code when it shut down: arbitrator
A Saskatoon arbitrator has ruled that former Saskatchewan Transportation Company employees should be paid almost nine weeks of lost salary and benefits.
The Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1374 filed a grievance last April. It argued that STC violated the Canadian Labour Code and sought wages, benefits and $500,000 in punitive damages.
Arbitrator William Hood ruled last month that two sections of the code were violated but denied the half-million in damages.
"While I question why the Employer would show up at the April 18, 2017 meeting to negotiate a new CBA when all the employees were in the process of being terminated, and refuse to talk about the closure, I am not convinced there is sufficient evidence of conduct warranting a punitive damages award against the Employer," Hood said in his decision.
ATU filed the grievance shortly after the government announced in the March 2017 budget it was winding down the bus company. It eliminated 40 positions in Saskatoon, 39 in Regina, and 19 in Prince Albert.
The bus company shut down on June 1, 2017.
Labour code violated
Hood awarded wages and benefits to 95 employees for a period of 16 weeks, minus the seven weeks in which they were given notice. Under section 212 of the Canadian Labour Code, employees are entitled to 16 weeks notice.
Hood also awarded employees $100 each totalling, $9,500 in damages, because STC violated section 214 of the code.
The ruling found that STC was in violation of the code because it terminated more than 50 employees in a four-week period. STC had argued the three centres of Regina, Saskatoon and Prince Albert were three separate entities, but the ruling found they were one "industrial establishment."
Hood disagreed with STC's argument that those who resigned and received severance gave up their employment rights.
"It offends logic to propose those who resigned did so voluntarily. A choice was a fallacy. STC was being wound down. There was no choice that avoided termination in these circumstances," Hood said.
He said the group termination provision applied in this case and found STC in violation of sections 212 and 214 of the code "because it did not provide adequate notice to the Union, and it did not establish a joint planning committee."